I want them to switch to using Spanish city names when they convert to Catholicism or become a European vassal anyway. Maybe they shouldn't settle outside of the traditional Aztec core as well until that point.Granted but I'm thinking in terms of mexico (being as the aztecs didn't even last to the industrial age nor accomplish any of it's UHV I think we can use mexico as a base)
perhaps spanish city names?
Yes. I've heard several complaints that the scoreboard didn't fit into their screen in the late game, especially from 3000 BC starts. And actually when running Strg+Z it was too large for me, too.Is it just me, or is the list of dead civs you've killed/witnessed dying gone now?
Sure, it made some the interface a little unwieldly, but it was nice to
have as a trophy list of sorts.
Another idea I just had: do you think it would make sense to add a short popup message when one of your UHV goals fails?
There are many goals where you don't know in advance when a goal could fail, and while I already changed the code so it fails as soon as you can't win it anymore, you still miss it sometimes and tech/conquer on or whatever.
Sounds good.
A warning 10 turns before the deadline might be good too if it won't cause too many notification
That's a little harder to implement. Is there a UHV goal where that would be useful? I mean, can you really change much in the outcome in 10 turns?Sounds good.
A warning 10 turns before the deadline might be good too if it won't cause too many notification
Ugh ... that was a hard decision.Leoreth, I think I wouldn't be the first to tell you that you are a very talented modder! But, sometimes you simply over-doing the stuff. Was it really that critical to rmove India from 3000 BC start to 1500 BC start?
The picture above is just iconic. The earliest cradles of civilization were those 4. No matter what you had in mind -- Dawn of Civilization MUST start with those 4 civs.
If you say that Harappa and Aryans had little in common and Indian civilization is Aryan civilization, I will argue that 3000 BC Sumeria had little in common with Babylonia. Please don't rewrite the classics and bring Indians back. If I see Spain spawns in Australia I would be less confused, I am telling ya
There is no such disinclination, except for China. There was a little bug in that system (the AI was told to only accept a tech if someone else than China knew it, but it only took civs it had contact with into account, which often meant it thought the tech was unique to China when in fact India etc. knew it), but that's fixed now. And even then I was able to keep a realistic tech lead as China with Great Wall in 400 AD and the cathedral goal before 800 AD (Monarch).So I'd like to suggest that obviously first and foremost,
the AIs current disinclination to refuse trade to the player be removed.
I agree, in most of my games I decide that GP are too useful to me to use Agrarianism. But it should have an economic downside, maybe reduced trade routes or trade yield?Second, for civs that start with Agrarianism, I believe that the -GPP% be removed.
There are other ways we can simulate the disadvantages of a peasant farmer centric-system.
For one, the value and experience level of troops would likely be less effective in such a society.
I propose that the -GPP% be changed to a reduced XP gain from military victories.
Sort of like a reverse Charismatic.
Good point, although no one forces you to go all out on your neighbours right from the startAlso, while France's new UP is good in theory, in practice in a real game, it's worthless.
Seriously, listen to me here. To fulfill the conquest UHV goal, you will be conquering all your neighbors, the ones who are friendly with you from shared religion.
Every other civ; Japan, Mughals, Ottomans will still treat you like dirt. As France, I am essentially playing without a UP until Secularism.
Either we go back to the old UP, or we can do something else.
Update your SVNAlso for the love of God, please disable Persecution pop-ups.
Ugh ... that was a hard decision.
While I had the rationalization of IVC != Indo-Aryans in mind when I did this (and it does make sense considering that you spawn at Dilli/Patliputra) and I would contend your Sumeria counter-example (Sumerian for example was like the Latin of Babylon, while there's no indication the Indo-Aryans even knew about the IVC), the actual reason was more from a gameplay perspective. India was hard to reign in, and it couldn't really cope with all the new resources and the food in the early game. I tried a lot of stuff to nudge it into the right direction but nothing worked, so I used the brutal approach. I think India is in a lot better shape now, both in the hands of the AI and in the player's. I don't really want to give up on all this again.
In the aftermath of the Indus Civilization's collapse, regional cultures emerged, to varying degrees showing the influence of the Indus Civilization. In the formerly great city of Harappa, burials have been found that correspond to a regional culture called the Cemetery H culture. At the same time, the Ochre Coloured Pottery culture expanded from Rajasthan into the Gangetic Plain. The Cemetery H culture has the earliest evidence for cremation; a practice dominant in Hinduism today.
There must be a more crafty way to nerf India. Modifiers, dynamic resources, early growth penalties, etc. If one has a headache you don't solve the problem by cutting the head off
I don't want to sound rude, but it's easy to make claims based on vague statements. Sometimes it's better to cut the knot.There must be a more crafty way to nerf India. Modifiers, dynamic resources, early growth penalties, etc. If one has a headache you don't solve the problem by cutting the head off
A little sneak peek?moar rome